Marijuana.com

Diabulous

If someone is pulled over and found to possess a reasonable quantity of marijuana they will be charged with possession with intent to distribute. I'm wondering how they can prove the intent that they charge someone with.

Our justice system is based on "reasonable doubt". Since no one can look into another's mind to prove definitively what their intent actually was, isn't that a reasonable doubt if they say they weren't intending to distribute? Whether you get caught with one ounce or 50 pounds, no one but you actually knows with any certainty what you're intention was. If you had already been charged previously with distribution that will hurt your cause of course, or if you are actually caught in the act of selling.

About 15 years ago I was pulled over on my way home after purchasing a HP. I had a QP in my front right pocket and another QP in the trunk. The cop wouldn't tell me why he had pulled me over. In fact, he blatantly ignored the question like I wasn't speaking at all. He told me to empty my pockets onto the trunk of my car. Rather than watch me do this, he walked up to the passenger side of my car to talk to my friend who was still sitting inside the car. By then, there were two more cop cars that had pulled up but I had to take my chances. I pulled out the QP and threw it into the ditch beside the road. As soon as it hit the ground a flashlight shined right where it landed. I looked up and there was a cop walking up from behind the first car that I hadn't seen because of all the flashing lights and floodlights shining on me. Apparently he thought it was something else or an animal or something because he just turned off the flashlight and didn't mention it. I guess they didn't feel the need to search the car or they would have found the other QP in the trunk. They let us go, never telling us why we were stopped. We went back the next day and got the other QP out of the ditch. Wouldn't that have been a sweet find for someone walking down the road!

Anyway, if the HP would have been found they would have charged me with intent to distribute even though that was not my intention at all. In fact, once the HP got to my house none of it ever left my house except in the form of smoke.

So my question is how can they actually prove intent and how can you fight an intent charge if you know you're intention was not what they claim it was?

And yes I used up my reserves of good luck that day. I've had nothing but bad luck ever since.

__________________

 

Buzzby

If you have an ounce of weed in 28 separate baggies, it is assumed that you were intending to sell it. If you have a HP in a room with a box of ziplocks and scales, it is assumed that you were intending to sell it.

They can't absolutely "prove" what your intent was, but they don't have to. They just have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. That means what a judge or jury will believe. If you ask the average person what possession of 28 dime bags means, he'll tell you that the person was intending to sell. A defense attorney would have a hard time arguing a judge or jury out of the position.

In many cases, a charge of possession with intent to sell is a bargaining chip. In plea bargaining, the prosecution will tell you that they'll drop the more serious charge if you'll plead guilty to simple possession.

EDIT: To the list of things that suggest "intent to sell", I should add the presence of large amounts of money in small bills. $5K in twenties would be pretty suspicious.

__________________

Andrew87

Actually, it would be quite unreasonable to assume that an amount like 50 pounds or even 2 pounds is meant for personal use. It is certainly possible that someone could purchase an amount like that for personal use, but it is overwhelmingly unlikely.

It may not have been, but it certainly wouldn't have looked good. In order
for someone to be found guilty of a crime, they don't necessarily need to be caught red-handed in the process of it, it just needs to be proven that they more than likely committed, or in your case, intended to commit, the crime. If it had been proven in your case that you more than likely intended to distribute the marijuana(had you been arrested/prosecuted), the burden of proof would have been on YOU to prove otherwise, and probably would've been hard, if not impossible based on the circumstances.


The State will attempt to prove intent by telling the jury/judge that the large amount you had far exceeded what could "reasonably" be considered a personal use quantity, or/and if it was packaged separately, which is "consistent with the distribution of marijuana". However, the most compelling evidence used to prove intent would be if the police found any "drug-dealing paraphernalia", such as scales or loose plastic bags in your car or on your person, or if you had prior charges for similar behavior. If a jury/judge is presented with all or even most of the above, you will look VERY guilty. That is how the State will attempt to prove intent. And as I stated earlier, they do not need to prove that you absolutely 100% intended to sell it, but just that you more than likely intended to.

dedbr

Andrew.....

I could never understand why someone would think this about herb....... Can everybody say harvest?

In Ohio since the drug laws were all overhauled and simplified, here's how they work....It is based on the amount in your possession. It's that simple. They don't have to prove intent. If you have 1 lbs. of processed marijuana, that is Trafficking. Period. End of discussion.

Of course, like Buzzby said, they will probably plea it down to a lesser charge. We have a first time offenders treatment plan here in Ohio, so we are one of the most lenient states as far as our drug laws, especially herb!


Some Where In Ded Land..........

__________________
"We have met the enemy, and he is us" .......... Pogo (for Prez...)

Remember to check out our most wonderful Posting Guidelines!

Diabulous

I concede that point. If it's already bagged up separately then it's obvious what was intended.

Maybe 50 pounds would be pushing it but I've known people that stock up to 10 pounds or more solely for their personal use. What they have never leaves their house. And if someone is lucky enough to have alot of land to grow on even a 50 pound harvest could be stored for future use with no intention to distribute.

That's my point exactly. They can't definitively prove whether someone intends to distribute or not so they carefully word the law in their favor because of this. Make them prove their innocence instead. If they cannot definitively prove someones guilt that person should never have to definitively prove their innocence. They know a person can't prove their innocence as far as intent any more than they can prove their guilt so they made the law to put the burden of proof on them when it's something unprovable. Then when they naturally can't give hard proof of their intent they get stuck with the charge whether or not it's applicable. That's just wrong on so many levels.

Even if it's not being trafficked when they find it? That's disgusting. If it went from your back yard into your home and that was the end of its journey when it got discovered, they should have to prove your intent to distribute not the other way around.

I can understand getting a charge of possession because if you get caught with some herb then possession is obvious. It's the whole "intent" laws that I have a major problem with. Intent is fundamentally unprovable so they put the burden of proof on us knowing our chances of winning.

So...scenario. If you got pulled over with a QP in brick form. No paraphernalia or anything else in the car related to drugs, how would you argue against an intent to distribute charge if that was truly not your intent? Most likely you would be SOL. We need major changes to the drug laws in this country.

 

dedbr

Dbl....

Welcome to the drug war.... We need the help.....


Some Where In Ded Land...........

Andrew87

Not exactly. The "intent to distribute" laws are used because a distribution charge won't hold up if the police don't actually observe the sale, or arrange the buy themselves using a confidential informant or undercover. And as I stated in my previous post, they don't have to definitively prove that you committed(or intended to commit) the crime, only that you more than likely did. This holds true for petty thievery, all the way up to murder. Think about how many crimes would go unsolved if the government actually had to prove that a person 100% no-doubt-about-it is guilty...


You seem to have misinterpreted what I wrote. A person would only need to prove their innocence as a rebuttal to the State's presentation of facts, so therefore, the prosecution's case would have to have some authenticity for it to even get to that point. Examples:

A) You are driving with two pounds, a digital scale, zip-lock bags, and a wad of cash in the car. You are pulled over, searched, and subsequently arrested. You are charged with possession with intent to distribute marijuana.

In this situation, the State would argue that the large amount of mj, scale, bags, and large amount of money are consistent with the distribution of drugs, and this is most likely also how a jury would see it. This is a situation where you have no legitimate defense and are SOL.

B) Your example: you got pulled over[and arrested] with a QP in brick form. No paraphernalia or anything else in the car related to drugs,[also no prior charges].

The prosecution would most likely try to argue that because of the amount you possessed, it was not meant solely for personal use. Your attorney's rebuttal to this would be that because the marijuana was in a single package, there were no other materials found to suggest distribution, and you do not have a record that suggests you are prone to such behavior, the drugs were meant for personal use. You can see how much different this situation is from the first, and that you actually have a decent shot at a jury believing this, and thus being found not guilty.

This we agree on. It's like how the government automatically assumes: 1 plant = 1 pound, regardless of any other factors.

Ev0

Sure but what they don't tell you is they will send you to jail for the resonated pipe and give you a felony while simply giving you a fine/misdemeanor for the actual drug itself.

Ohio is really screwy about this I know alot of freinds that smoke nothing but joints now because of that law alone.